RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

The Berkeley campus encourages and maintains the highest ethical standards in research. This means not just the avoidance of wrongdoing, but also the rigor, carefulness, and accountability that are hallmarks of good scholarship. All persons engaged in research at the University are responsible for adhering to the highest standards of intellectual honesty and integrity in research. Faculty and other supervisors of research activities have a responsibility to create an environment which encourages those high standards and integrity in research. Open publication and discussion, emphasis on quality of research, appropriate supervision, maintenance of accurate and detailed research procedures and results, and suitable assignment of credit and responsibility for research and publications are essential for fostering intellectual honesty and integrity in research.

One feature of this commitment is the University's response to allegations of misconduct. If proven, misconduct can result in a range of sanctions, depending on the circumstances involved. Detailed information on this subject is available on the campus Research website at http://research.chance.berkeley.edu/page.cfm?id=105.

Misconduct in Research Defined

"Misconduct in research" is a technical term defined by federal regulations. Institutions that accept research funding from federal agencies are required by the Office of Research Integrity to have policies and procedures in place for the management of incidents of research misconduct, which is defined as:

Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the academic community for proposing, conducting or reporting research.

Reporting Misconduct

Any student, staff, faculty member, or individual outside of the University community may be a subject of a research misconduct inquiry. If an investigative committee determines that research misconduct has occurred, the Vice Chancellor for Research recommends to the Executive Vice Chancellor that the matter be adjudicated according to the University Policy on Faculty Conduct and the Administration of Discipline, June 14, 1974 (APM 016), including the Faculty Code of Conduct, August 26, 1988 (APM 015).

Any student, staff, faculty, individual outside of the University community, or a University committee such as the Institutional Review Board may report incidents of alleged research misconduct. Normally, allegations are addressed to the Vice Chancellor for Research, the dean of the school or college, or the director of the program which has primary affiliation with the individual being reported. These officials counsel the reporter. If the initial report of misconduct is oral, it must be put in writing before a preliminary inquiry can proceed.

In accordance with the campus policy, the proceedings of an inquiry into research misconduct are confidential to protect the members of the inquiry panel, the individual filing the allegation, the person accused, and the witnesses, to the maximum extent possible. All individuals are asked to refrain from discussing the matter with anyone, including faculty members, students, family members, and the media.

The Misconduct Investigation Process

The following outlines procedures to be followed once an allegation or other evidence of misconduct is received. A detailed account is provided on http://research.chance.berkeley.edu/page.cfm?id=105.

Preliminary Inquiry: The Vice Chancellor for Research and /or the Research Integrity Officer (RIO) assesses the reported incident to determine if it constitutes a bona fide allegation of research misconduct—i.e., does the alleged incident fit the definition of scientific misconduct and is the evidence provided in the report of the incident pertinent to the allegation being made? If it is concluded that a bona fide allegation of research misconduct has been made, the misconduct procedure enters its inquiry phase.

Inquiry: Upon receiving an allegation of research misconduct, the Vice Chancellor for Research appoints one or more persons to conduct an inquiry to determine whether there is sufficient substance to the allegation to warrant a formal investigation. The purpose of the inquiry is not to reach a final conclusion as to whether misconduct occurred or who was responsible. This preliminary phase of information gathering and fact-finding should take no more than 60 calendar days from the receipt of the allegation unless circumstances clearly warrant a longer period. If the inquiry finds sufficient evidence to warrant a formal investigation, the Vice Chancellor for Research promptly (within 30 calendar days) initiates the process as follows.

Investigation: An Investigative Committee is appointed to determine whether there exists probable cause that research misconduct has occurred, and, if so, to make recommendations with respect to the imposition of disciplinary sanctions. The investigation phase should be completed within 120 days from the appointment of the investigative committee, unless circumstances warrant a longer period. If the investigation stage is extended beyond 120 days, the reasons for doing so should be documented.

In the case of a faculty member, the investigative committee is appointed by the Vice Chancellor for Research (VCR). It will be constituted from members of the Academic Senate, and contain from one to three members. A larger committee may be appointed if in the opinion of the VCR it would facilitate the investigation.